PAKISTANFOREVER
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2015
- Messages
- 17,371
- Reaction score
- -6
- Country
- Location
Stimson Poll: Vast Majority of Indians Believe Nuclear War Against Pakistan is Winnable
- Thread starter RiazHaq
- Start date
Imran Khan
PDF VETERAN
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2007
- Messages
- 68,815
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
Yeah i have idra sir . We will be like anything but not worse as pakistan afghanistan .no one want to be pakistan or afghanistan on this planet .
its not pride, its delusion, do these people not understand how Mutually assured destruction works? in a full scale nuclear war, no one wins. Mutually assured destruction works under the principle where both sides understand that they will die, but they will make sure they take the other side with them. The idea being that as long as the principle is in place and the other side is rational, they will be hesitant to pursue full scale warfare. Only a fool looks at full scale nuclear warfare and thinks they can "win". its like putting on. suicide vest, blowing yourself up on your foe, but expecting you will somehow survive the bomb exploding. its absurd delusion. Modern Nuclear weapons make Hiroshima and Nagasaki look like child's toys, at 10-15Kt blasts, now nuclear weapons range from 1Mt to 60Mt blasts, for the mathematically challenged, 1Mt = 1000Kt, so 60Mt = 60,000kt or something akin to 600 times larger than Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which were only 2 bombs, and some nuclear arsenals are in the thousands, so you can imagine the destruction that it will cause, there is no "winning" here.
Huh? When did it do that? 80K dead and $150bn loss to the economy? Daily drone attacks killing thousands of Pakistanis, CIA and it's proxies BLA/TTP/MQM run amok in Pakistan. And now behind even Bangers in economic output and GDP?
What the Iranian scholar Albiruni said about Hindus, echoed centuries later by Vivekananda
In this excerpt from his book ‘Dharma’, Chaturvedi Badrinath examines the first ever dialogue between Islamic and Hindu thought.
scroll.in
Albiruni's observations on Hindus:
The Hindus believe that there is no country but theirs, no nation like theirs, no kings like theirs, no religion like theirs, no science like theirs. They are haughty, foolishly vain, self-conceited, and stolid. They are by nature niggardly in communicating that which they know, and they take the greatest possible care to withhold it from men of another caste among their own people, still much more, of course, from any foreigner. According to their belief, there is no other country on earth but theirs, no other race of man but theirs, and no created beings besides them have any knowledge or science whatsoever...
...all their fanaticism is directed against those who do not belong to them – against all foreigners. They call them mlechha, ie impure, and forbid any connection with them, be it by intermarriage or any other kind of relationship, or by sitting, eating, and drinking with them, because thereby, they think, they would be polluted.
---------
The earliest, indeed the very first, dialogue between a Muslim scientist and Hindu thought took place when Albiruni (971-1039) arrived in India in the second decade of the eleventh century in circumstances that were rather ironical. He came as a camp follower of Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni (967-1030). Whereas the chief purpose of Sultan Mahmud, the king of Ghazni, was to plunder the immense wealth in the form of gold and money at some of the more famous Hindu temples, the sole aim of Albiruni was to gain from the immense riches of Indian philosophies and the sciences.
That was probably also the time when Indian sciences had, on the whole, no longer anything of theoretical importance to add to their earlier great achievements. The most creative period of science in India was over by a century or two, perhaps. None of the sources Albiruni mentions in his Ta’rikh-ul-Hind was contemporary.
In this excerpt from his book ‘Dharma’, Chaturvedi Badrinath examines the first ever dialogue between Islamic and Hindu thought.
What the Iranian scholar Albiruni said about Hindus, echoed centuries later by Vivekananda
In this excerpt from his book ‘Dharma’, Chaturvedi Badrinath examines the first ever dialogue between Islamic and Hindu thought.
scroll.in
Albiruni's observations on Hindus:
The Hindus believe that there is no country but theirs, no nation like theirs, no kings like theirs, no religion like theirs, no science like theirs. They are haughty, foolishly vain, self-conceited, and stolid. They are by nature niggardly in communicating that which they know, and they take the greatest possible care to withhold it from men of another caste among their own people, still much more, of course, from any foreigner. According to their belief, there is no other country on earth but theirs, no other race of man but theirs, and no created beings besides them have any knowledge or science whatsoever...
...all their fanaticism is directed against those who do not belong to them – against all foreigners. They call them mlechha, ie impure, and forbid any connection with them, be it by intermarriage or any other kind of relationship, or by sitting, eating, and drinking with them, because thereby, they think, they would be polluted.
---------
The earliest, indeed the very first, dialogue between a Muslim scientist and Hindu thought took place when Albiruni (971-1039) arrived in India in the second decade of the eleventh century in circumstances that were rather ironical. He came as a camp follower of Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni (967-1030). Whereas the chief purpose of Sultan Mahmud, the king of Ghazni, was to plunder the immense wealth in the form of gold and money at some of the more famous Hindu temples, the sole aim of Albiruni was to gain from the immense riches of Indian philosophies and the sciences.
That was probably also the time when Indian sciences had, on the whole, no longer anything of theoretical importance to add to their earlier great achievements. The most creative period of science in India was over by a century or two, perhaps. None of the sources Albiruni mentions in his Ta’rikh-ul-Hind was contemporary.
araz
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2006
- Messages
- 9,291
- Reaction score
- 81
I dont know whether to laugh or cry at your post. Arey bhai nothing will survive in a Nuclear war in Pakistan. 80% of current India will be charred to cinder. Tue rest will have a life unworthy of living. The nuclear cloud will further cause massive devastation of crops/lives/livestock across all of Asia and most of EU. This will result in 1/2 the world dying of starvation or radiation sickness. So yes 20% of India will survive only to die of disease or hunger. Yet we will measure dick over Agni 5 and Shaheen 3. SubhanAllah.Pakistan’s longest range missile, Shaheen-III, has a max range of 2,750 kilometers. The missile uses a two-stage, solid propellant propulsion system. It is mounted on a Chinese TEL.
Given that Shaheen-III is Pakistan’s most powerful missile, it is essential to see how it fares with India’s most potent nuclear-capable missile — Agni-V.
Agni-V uses a three-stage, solid propellant propulsion system and is transported by a truck and launched with a canister. Its maximum velocity during the terminal phase reaches Mach 24. It is guided by a highly accurate ring laser gyroscope inertial navigation system that can strike a target within 10 meters.It has an operational range of 5,500-8,000 kilometers.It can even reach China’s eastern seaboard, where most of its economic output is concentrated.
In hindsight, there is no comparison between Shaheen-III and Agni-V as the latter completely outguns Shaheen-III due to its superior navigation system, propulsion, range, and terminal phase velocity. On top of that, Agni-V is an ICBM, whereas Shaheen-III is a medium-range ballistic missile. A better Indian missile to compare with Shaheen-III will be Agni-III.
Like Shaheen-III, Agni-III also has two-staged, Solid propellant propulsion. Agni-III has an edge over Shaheen-III in mobility and launch versatility.
While Shaheen-III is only road-mobile, Agni-III is both rail and road-mobile. Agni-III also has a superior guidance system than Shaheen-3. Agni-III operates on a Ring Laser Gyroscope inertial navigation system (same as Agni-V) and is augmented by GPS/NaVIC satellite guidance.
Pakistani's thinks that the Shaheen-III can impede India’s second-strike capabilityHowever, it is essential to note here that India has a functioning nuclear triad, and a mere targeting of its land-based launching facilities will not disable India’s second-strike capability.
Pakistan has come a long way in creating credible deterrence with the induction of Shaheen-III. However, they are still way behind India in missile technology. They will take centuries to catch up, even with the help of China.
A
Kyusuibu Honbu
BANNED
- Joined
- May 21, 2010
- Messages
- 15,305
- Reaction score
- -21
- Country
- Location
Let not get into semantics here
Nuclear war with Pakistan is winnable as long below Aaatomi taknology is used
According Pak minster Sheikh Rasheed Ahmed
Pakistan minister Sheikh Rasheed Ahmed threatens India with nuclear war
Pak has advanched taknology allowing its nuclear weapons to discern human targets by faith
A taknological wonder beyond USA and Russia
Since the words "calculated" is used, I am guessing ability to discern human targets on faith is done by machine learning
So in a nuclear war with Pakistan approximately 204 million Indian Muslims will remain alive and continue the existence of the nation
Also removing their frustrations on the internet due to absent Serbian fathers
Sinnerman108
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2009
- Messages
- 8,994
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
Stimson Poll: Vast Majority of Indians Believe Nuclear War Against Pakistan is Winnable
Vast majority of Indians, including those who oppose Prime Minister Narendra Modi, believe that nuclear war is "winnable", according to the ...www.southasiainvestor.com
Vast majority of Indians, including those who oppose Prime Minister Narendra Modi, believe that nuclear war is "winnable", according to the results of a Stimson Center poll released recently. They want their country to build a bigger nuclear arsenal than China and Pakistan combined. Responding to the clamor for more nukes, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said in 2019 that Indian nuclear weapons were not kept as mere showpieces. Strong belief about India's ability to win a nuclear war against Pakistan cuts across party lines with 91% of those who support Mr. Modi and 85% of those who don't. Recently, a group of researchers at Rutgers University considered a hypothetical nuclear conflict between India and Pakistan as they believed such a conflict was the most likely. The group warned that an India-Pakistan nuclear exchange will be catastrophic for the region with tens of millions of immediate fatalities in the war zone, followed by hundreds of millions of starvation deaths around the globe.
The poll also finds that the overwhelming majority of Indians are confident their military can defeat both China and Pakistan. They expect that the United States military would come to India's aid in the event of a war with China or Pakistan. Stimson Center analysts believe that "Indian self-confidence may lead to mistaken popular views of Indian military prowess: India has considerable military capabilities against its most likely regional opponents. Yet Indian confidence that India would likely defeat China or Pakistan may exceed what a careful net assessment might warrant".
The nuclear arsenals of India, Pakistan and China are small but growing faster than those of other nuclear-armed countries, according to a report in The Economist magazine. The combined nuclear stockpiles of China (350 warheads), India (160) and Pakistan (165) now exceed British and French arsenals in Europe (around 500 in total). All three countries are now building their own nuclear “triads”: nukes deliverable from land, air and sea.
The Stimson survey was conducted by phone with a random sample of 7000 Indians between April 13 and May 14, 2022. Below are its key findings as reported by Christopher Clary, Sameer Lalwani, Niloufer Siddiqui and Neelanjan Sircar:
1. High levels of support for Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who likely remains among the most popular national leaders in the world today;
2. Extraordinary nationalist sentiment among Indians, at high levels compared to prior cross-national surveys using identical question wording;
3. Troubling signs of intolerance toward India’s large Muslim minority, which helps provide context to recent controversies;
4. Strong confidence in the Indian government’s ability to defend India against potential domestic and foreign threats;
5. Expectations among a majority of Indian respondents that the U.S. military would support India in the event of a war with China or Pakistan; and
6. Large majorities in favor of Indian numerical nuclear superiority against its adversaries.
Related Links:
Haq's Musings
South Asia Investor Review
Muslims Worse Off Than Dalits in India
General Kidwai on Pakistan's 2nd Strike Capability
Dalit Death Shines Light on India's Caste Apartheid
Caste Discrimination Rampant Among Silicon Valley Indians
Rape: A Political Weapon in Modi's India
Hindutva: The Legacy of the British Rulers "Divide and Rule" Project
Will Modi's Hindutva Lead to Multiple Partitions of India?
Riaz Haq Youtube Channel
PakAlumni: Pakistani Social Network
Stimson Poll: Vast Majority of Indians Believe Nuclear War Against Pakistan is Winnable
Vast majority of Indians, including those who oppose Prime Minister Narendra Modi, believe that nuclear war is "winnable", according to the ...
A vast majority of ******** are insecure little wankers.
Imran Khan
PDF VETERAN
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2007
- Messages
- 68,815
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
Indians are always agrassors sir
'Pakistan isn't Collapsing, India Should Focus on Silver Linings. Boycott or War Aren't Options'
In a 30-minute interview to Karan Thapar for The Wire to discuss his book ‘India’s Pakistan Conundrum’, Sharat Sabharwal ( ex Indian Ambassador to Pakistan) identified three preconceived notions that the Indian people must discard. First, he says it’s not in India’s interests to promote the disintegration of Pakistan. “The resulting chaos will not leave India untouched”.
Second, Indians must disabuse themselves of the belief that India has the capacity to inflict a decisive military blow on Pakistan in conventional terms. “The nuclear dimension has made it extremely risky, if not impossible, for India to give a decisive military blow to Pakistan to coerce it into changing its behaviour.”
Third, Indians must disabuse themselves of the belief that they can use trade to punish Pakistan. “Use of trade as an instrument to punish Pakistan is both short-sighted and ineffective because of the relatively small volume of Pakistani exports to India.”
------------
Historically, the relationship between India and Pakistan has been mired in conflicts, war, and lack of trust. Pakistan has continued to loom large on India's horizon despite the growing gap between the two countries. This book examines the nature of the Pakistani state, its internal dynamics, and its impact on India.
The text looks at key issues of the India-Pakistan relationship, appraises a range of India's policy options to address the Pakistan conundrum, and proposes a way forward for India's Pakistan policy. Drawing on the author's experience of two diplomatic stints in Pakistan, including as the High Commissioner of India, the book offers a unique insider's perspective on this critical relationship.
A crucial intervention in diplomatic history and the analysis of India's Pakistan policy, the book will be of as much interest to the general reader as to scholars and researchers of foreign policy, strategic studies, international relations, South Asia studies, diplomacy, and political science.
books.telegraph.co.uk
In a 30-minute interview to Karan Thapar for The Wire to discuss his book ‘India’s Pakistan Conundrum’, Sharat Sabharwal ( ex Indian Ambassador to Pakistan) identified three preconceived notions that the Indian people must discard. First, he says it’s not in India’s interests to promote the disintegration of Pakistan. “The resulting chaos will not leave India untouched”.
Second, Indians must disabuse themselves of the belief that India has the capacity to inflict a decisive military blow on Pakistan in conventional terms. “The nuclear dimension has made it extremely risky, if not impossible, for India to give a decisive military blow to Pakistan to coerce it into changing its behaviour.”
Third, Indians must disabuse themselves of the belief that they can use trade to punish Pakistan. “Use of trade as an instrument to punish Pakistan is both short-sighted and ineffective because of the relatively small volume of Pakistani exports to India.”
------------
Historically, the relationship between India and Pakistan has been mired in conflicts, war, and lack of trust. Pakistan has continued to loom large on India's horizon despite the growing gap between the two countries. This book examines the nature of the Pakistani state, its internal dynamics, and its impact on India.
The text looks at key issues of the India-Pakistan relationship, appraises a range of India's policy options to address the Pakistan conundrum, and proposes a way forward for India's Pakistan policy. Drawing on the author's experience of two diplomatic stints in Pakistan, including as the High Commissioner of India, the book offers a unique insider's perspective on this critical relationship.
A crucial intervention in diplomatic history and the analysis of India's Pakistan policy, the book will be of as much interest to the general reader as to scholars and researchers of foreign policy, strategic studies, international relations, South Asia studies, diplomacy, and political science.
India's Pakistan Conundrum : Managing a Complex Relationship
Historically, the relationship between India and Pakistan has been mired in conflicts, war, and lack of trust. Pakistan has continued to loom large on India's horizon despite the growing gap ...
PakistaniandProud
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2012
- Messages
- 1,336
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Not entirely. There are multiple benefits.
There's the detereance factor not just between India & Pakistan, but Pakistan and other countries. There's the "respect" factor that Pakistan gains in Muslim worlds. There's the "technology" factor that puts Pakistan ahead in this category ahead of many other nations. There's also a counter strike factor via warheads and submarines where nuclear states have a second strike capability (retliate) if there nation is attacked. There are many more benefits.
In case of WW3, 99% of people on earth die. In these modern times it's better to have nukes than not to have them, in this case, Pakistan is both blessed and not blessed but blessed before the unblessed.
There's more to it than that.
India sacks 3 air force (#IAF) officers for firing #missile into #Pakistan. Earlier, #India blamed a “technical malfunction” during routine maintenance. Military experts have warned of the risk of accidents or miscalculations by #nuclear-armed neighbors.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...firing-missile-into-pakistan?CMP=share_btn_tw
The Indian air force has said it has sacked three officers for accidentally firing a missile into Pakistan in March.
“A court of inquiry, set up to establish the facts of the case, including fixing responsibility for the incident, found that deviation from the standard operating procedures by three officers led to the accidental firing of the missile,” the air force said.
At the time of the accidental firing, India blamed a “technical malfunction” during routine maintenance.
Military experts have warned of the risk of accidents or miscalculations by the nuclear-armed neighbours, which have fought three wars and engaged in numerous smaller armed clashes, usually over the disputed territory of Kashmir. The incident raised questions about safety mechanisms.
Pakistani officials said the missile was unarmed and crashed near the city of Mian Channu, about 310 miles (500km) from the capital, Islamabad.
India's March 9 "accidental firing" of Brahmos nuclear-capable supersonic cruise missile into Pakistan has raised serious questions about the safety of the Indian nuclear arsenal. Do the people in charge of India's nukes have basic competence to handle such weapons? Was this really an "unauthorized" or "accidental" firing? Why was there a long delay by New Delhi in acknowledging the incident? Could Pakistan be blamed if it assumed that extremist right-wing Hindu elements had taken control of the missile system in India and fired it deliberately into Pakistani territory? Has the Indian government risked the lives of 1.6 billion people of South Asia?
www.southasiainvestor.com
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...firing-missile-into-pakistan?CMP=share_btn_tw
The Indian air force has said it has sacked three officers for accidentally firing a missile into Pakistan in March.
“A court of inquiry, set up to establish the facts of the case, including fixing responsibility for the incident, found that deviation from the standard operating procedures by three officers led to the accidental firing of the missile,” the air force said.
At the time of the accidental firing, India blamed a “technical malfunction” during routine maintenance.
Military experts have warned of the risk of accidents or miscalculations by the nuclear-armed neighbours, which have fought three wars and engaged in numerous smaller armed clashes, usually over the disputed territory of Kashmir. The incident raised questions about safety mechanisms.
Pakistani officials said the missile was unarmed and crashed near the city of Mian Channu, about 310 miles (500km) from the capital, Islamabad.
India's March 9 "accidental firing" of Brahmos nuclear-capable supersonic cruise missile into Pakistan has raised serious questions about the safety of the Indian nuclear arsenal. Do the people in charge of India's nukes have basic competence to handle such weapons? Was this really an "unauthorized" or "accidental" firing? Why was there a long delay by New Delhi in acknowledging the incident? Could Pakistan be blamed if it assumed that extremist right-wing Hindu elements had taken control of the missile system in India and fired it deliberately into Pakistani territory? Has the Indian government risked the lives of 1.6 billion people of South Asia?
Can Modi's India Be Trusted With Nukes?
India's March 9 "accidental firing" of Brahmos nuclear-capable supersonic cruise missile into Pakistan has raised serious questions about th...
Similar threads
